Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-03-03
Mr. Turpie's Case, &c,

We were glad to learn, as we did
from the report OF the proceedings OF
the United States Senate ON Tuesday,
that MIR. HoAR, and presumably the
Senate itself, had correct opinion re-
latiye to the time when any question can
properly be raised as to the right OF q
person claiming to be senstor-elect, to
take his seat. We allude to the facts,
first. that Mr.. HoAB, from the Commit
tee OF Privileges and Elections, asked
to be discharged from the further con-
sideration of the papers from Indiana
protesting against the seating OF Mr.
TuRp1r, and, second, that the Senate
granted the request. Thisis recogni-
ton of the right of the Senate OF each
Congress to Judge of the elections, quail
ifications, and returns OF its own mem
bers.
The same reasons which influenced
the Senate to come to that conclusion
ought to serve TO convince that body
that the Senate of the Forty-ninth Con-
gress has no right TO elect o President
Dro tenn. for the Senate Of the Fiftieth
Congress-not even though the failure
to do 80 might put it into the power OF
Mr. RIDpLEBRRaHR to elect President
pro tenn, OF at any rate to prevent the
election of any Republican with whom
he was not on friendly terms.
1t is easy TO understand how the GUS
tom originated of electing President
pro tenn. in advance of the time when one
was needed by the Senate. Itgew out
of the unconstitutional law making the
President pro tenn. Of the Senate pos
sible successor to the Office OF President
OF the United States. 1t was considered
wise that there should be President
pro TEN. OF the Senate always in office
ready to I'LL any vacancy that might
occur in the Office OF Presi-
dent of the United States. But
that unconstitutional law, thanks to
Chief-Justice CHASE, has been re-
pealed, and there is now no reason
worth considering why President
Dro tenn. OF the Senate should be
elected before the Speaker OF the
House of Representatives is elected
The fact that the twenty-odd new sen
ators are entitled to vote for the Presl
dent pro tenn. of the Senate--are en-
titled, indeed, to be candidates for that
Office themselves-would seem to us tC
be conclusive evidence that the twenty
odd retiring senators have no constitu
tional right to act for the twenty-odt
incoming senators.
But what difference does it make ii 9
new President pro tenn. OF the Senate
can be elected on any day? But IL
the case now under consideration, tn
new Senate, it is supposed, might hav'
Dtcu uLihOlc w % III"
pro tenn. belonging to the Republican
party, but able to keep in office on
elected beforehand. In other words
a tied Senate could not elect new no
turn out an old President pro TEN
This was the consideration which le
to the substitution Of INGALLS, TO
SHERMAN. SHERMAS's new term begin
ON the 4th instant, and he could not hol
over next session the Office of Presiden
pro tenn. INGALLS, can. So ISGALL
was put into SHEEMAN's place. Thu
was the Senate of the Fiftieth Cor
gress robbed of its right to elect Pre-
sident pro tenn. by the Senate OF tn
Forty-ninth Congress And in this fs'
we find another confirmation of ia
theory that the Senate of one Congre'
has no right to elect President pr
tenn. for the next or any future Coz
gress.